Clint Dempsey

I have a post on the small matter of tomorrow's Massachusetts Senate election underway, but figured I'd fire this off ASAP. Dempsey was injured in Fulham's 2-0 loss to Blackburn Rovers yesterday, which is not a positive development for the US MNT's chances in the upcoming World Cup.

Read more...

World Cup draw Part II

I largely agree with everything that Paul has written, and the comments thread off of that one is excellent. Having had my daughter for the last three days, I've not had an opportunity to do much of, well, anything beyond pay her attention and acquiesce to her three-year old demands, so now that I have a moment, I'll offer some comments.

I'll take this group by group, and go out on a limb and predict the qualifiers (in order), and then have a bit more to say about our [*] chances at the end, tomorrow.

Group A: South Africa, Mexico, Uruguay, France.

Prediction: Mexico, France.

This group has been underrated, especially by the French media. Yes, S.A. are not so good, and in the international media they are two names, in this order: Pienaar and McCarthy. But I own a Kaizer Chiefs jersey so I figure I should defend these guys (the Chiefs were in Durban the same time I was; they for a match, me for a conference, they checked in as I checked out, and I said hey, can I? Couldn't tell the lads that I really wanted an Orlando Pirates jersey, could I?) SA will have the home side advantage, and as Paul notes, the host side has pretty much always made it out of the group stage. Second, there is talent there. I know this kid probably will only see garbage time, but a name to remember is Claasen. Plays for Jonge Ajax. If I remember anything from my three years in Amsterdam and Holland, it's that Ajax still have one of the best youth academies on the planet.

All that said, they don't qualify. Why Mexico over France? Having watched both legs of an above average Ireland side against France, the latter were out played. France aren't France any longer. Furthermore, and critically as any Yank knows, altitude matters. Mexico are conditioned and used to playing in Azteca Stadium. I haven't looked at the fixtures that close, but the critical match in this group, France v Mexico, is at altitude.

Our rivals to the south take this group. And Uruguay don't suck either, even though they did a France themselves to get past Costa Rica in the playoff.

Group B: Argentina, Nigeria, South Korea, Greece.

Prediction: Argentina, Greece.

This is a tough group on several levels. First, who manages Argentina? If it's the original Hand of God, he has, as one British broadsheet said yesterday, an inimitable ability to make a good side look crap. Give Messi, Aimar, et al. a proper manager, they top the group easy. But it gets a bit more complicated below Argentina. Greece are not what they were in Euro 2004. But then Nigeria also aren't what they once were. These days, the Super Eagles have Nwankwo Kanu leading the side (and the front line), with the still emerging talent of Mikel Obi as the future. Any Arsenal fan will have an opinion on the soon-to-be relegated Kanu. I don't see Nigeria being what they once were. I suspect that South Korea finish third ahead of Nigeria, and it's not because Celtic signed Ki Sung-Yong. There's more talent in every position on this side, whereas Nigeria seem to be isolating their value in a few key players.

Group C: England, United States, Algeria, Slovenia.

Prediction: England, United States.

Right. Don't underestimate Slovenia, any of you.

Group D: Germany, Australia, Serbia, Ghana.

Prediction: Germany and Serbia (and a punt).

Germany win this group. But any of the other three can finish second. If I had to bet, I would bet on Serbia, but don't underestimate the Australians (see 2006.) And if England finish first, and the Australians finish second, your best match of the last 16 (outside of the match the Americans are playing in) is England - Australia, just for the sheer provincial jingoistic value of it (it would be like cricket in reverse).

And Ghana may be all about Essien in the international media, but they have a reputation of being well organized in a disorganized way. Which, as a faux statistician, I can appreciate. But more critically, they have a lot of youth, and their kids have done well in FIFA tournaments in the past decade or so. That said, I still see them finishing last in this tough group. Serbia are that good.

It's a tough one to call, Group D.

Group E: Netherlands, Denmark, Japan, Cameroon.

Prediction: Holland and Denmark.

The Oranje are not playing 'total football', and they're better for it -- they haven't had a Cruyff, Neeskens, or even a van Basten in a generation or two. Hell, Bergkamp hasn't played for the Oranje since Euro 2000. They win easily. The Ajax keeper is solid, van Bronckhorst only gets better with age, van Bommel has peaked but is still useful, hopefully van Persie is fit, and the rest, man, we wish we had this side. Denmark have a core of talent that has peaked under excellent management -- allowing Martin Olsen to manage the side since . . . when? 2000. This has instilled a sense of stability, and considering, superficially, the relatively thin side talent-wise, this is impressive. They topped Portugal and Sweden (and an impressive Hungary side) in qualification. Japan always play well, and are smattered with some talent (Nakamura, who plays for Espanyol, has the best free kick on the planet, Beckham be damned, but then I am a Celtic supporter), but aren't up to the Danes. Cameroon have to be a dark horse here. Look at their squad on Wiki, and you'll see if I am not mistaken, aside from two poor souls who play for Spurs, they each play at different top flight clubs in the top five leagues (aside from the few stragglers who are playing for clubs in Turkey (2), Scotland (N'Guemo has the misfortune of playing for Tony Mowbray at Celtic), Austria and Switzerland). A lot of quality in that side.

Group F: Italy, Paraguay, New Zealand, Slovakia.

Prediction: Italy, Paraguay.

Italy are old, over rated, and I dislike them with a passion I would normally hold in reserve for Rangers. But this group is a cakewalk. Slovakia are touted in the European media, because of their group performance. But let's look at that closely. Who were in that group:

Slovakia

Slovenia

Czech Republic

Norn Iron

Poland

The Mountaintop (San Marino)

I know I gave Slovenia some cred above, but that's based on their playoff performance against a real side: Russia. This group ought to have resulted in the Czechs and Poland, but both sides were fragile and thin. And as much as I love Northern Ireland and David Healy et al., let's be realistic: Norn Iron gave this group a respectable run. If the Northern Irish are giving your group a run, it's not a strong group. There is some quality in Slovakia, especially at the back, but I don't see them going through.

Paraguay, on the other hand, took four points out of six from Argentina in qualification, won at home and lost away with Brazil (but the goal differential was in Paraguay's favor: 3-2), lost at home to Chile 0-2 yet won away 3-0 . . . I have to go with Paraguay for second here.

Who was the fourth side in this group? Oh right. The All Whites. Who wouldn't even be here if it wasn't for Australia's defection to Asia. If their playoff hero is one Rory Fallon, of my local side Plymouth Argyle (who have been in the relegation zone all season of the English second tier) and one of their best players is Chris Killen, of Celtic (who rarely sees the pitch), you're in trouble. They do have Ryan Nelson, who allegedly plays respectfully for Blackburn Rovers . . .

Group G: Brazil, North Korea, Cote D'Ivoire, Portugal.

Prediction: Brazil (going out on a limb here I am), Cote D'Ivoire.

The so called group of death. It isn't. It's not as though every tournament every year requires a group of death. In 2006, Italy, USA, Czech Republic, Ghana, now that was a group of death. On paper, at least until Arena's side played, there was no pushover. Everybody should get 3 from our nuclear-eneabled friends of the Axis of Evil. Unless Kim calls in an airstrike.

Why Cote D'Ivoire and not Portugal? I'd like to say it's because the Ivory Coast had a much more impressive qualification run than Portugal did, but let's be honest: they didn't. Portugal had a more difficult path, until the playoffs, where they barely managed to get past Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is gut instinct here, Portugal are over-rated, I have a dislike for one Ronaldo that I would normally reserve for the Kenny Millers and Barry Fergusons of the world, and I feel it's Cote D'Ivorie's time.

Oh, and they have a couple blokes who play up front for Chelsea.

Group H: Spain, Switzerland, Honduras, Chile.

Prediction: Spain, Chile.

Spain are Spain. The Confederations Cup blip aside, they're currently in my (Yank) opinion, the best side on the planet. This group comes down to second, and even here, it's an easy call. Chile performed admirably in a difficult qualification group, finishing second. As much respect as I have for the Swiss side, who have done a good job in the past several tournaments (they have a tendency to qualify . . . and I'll leave others to exploit the obvious stereotypical cliches) their qualification run wasn't exactly challenging. It was Greece. Whom they beat by a single point. Somehow, Luxembourg took five points out of this group.

[*] Being a beersnob of some repute, I belong to something of an ad-hoc yet exclusive international mailing list of like minded arrogant fucks (and this is as exclusive as I ever will be: a bunch of pissheads who know their way around a pint). Several of the guys (and yes, sadly, we're all guys) on the list follow this game. So when the draw was made, I sent out an email to said list, and said something to the effect that "we can make it out of this group". The first response was from a friend of mine who resides in Manhattan (and by virtue of his owning season tickets to the Yankees, an eternal enemy of LGM): "Who is the "we" (though I have a feeling you mean both your native and adopted lands)?"

I don't mean both.

UPDATE: Randy Paul's predictions at Beautiful Horizons match mine, aside from having France win their group (I predict Mexico) and swapping Chile and Switzerland . . . more people seem to be going for the Swiss, but I'm sticking to my guns.

Read more...

World Cup draw

Some very preliminary thoughts:

Great draw for both the U.S. and England. Algeria is clearly the weakest African team and Slovenia might be the softest Euro side. Right now it looks like it would be a monumental upset for the Mother Country not to make it through group play, while the U.S. will be a very solid favorite to do so. And of course this sets up a replay of the famous 1950 game -- quite arguably the biggest upset in the history of major international sports. Another big break for the U.S. is that the world's four top-ranked teams (Spain, Brazil, the Netherlands, and Italy) are all on the other side of the draw, which means the Americans can reach the semis without facing any of them.

France: Unbelievable. After FIFA did what it could to punish the Gallic hand of God, they draw not only South Africa, but the weakest South American team (Uruguay) as well. Mexico is the other fortunate recipient in this group so two-thirds of NAFTA should be in the knockout round.

Most unlucky team: Probably Portugal. The European power is stuck in a monster group with Brazil and the best African team (Cote d' Ivoire), and as an extra special bonus will almost surely have to play world #1 Spain in the round of 16 if they manage to get through group play.

Relatedly, Spain probably has the easiest route to group play, but then is bracketed opposite the Group of Death, and will probably have to knock off a very good team in the round of 16 and then Brazil just to reach the semis.

Most certain to go home early: North Korea

Most likely #1 seed not to make it through other than South Africa (no host team has ever failed to get through group play but it seems unlikely they will): It's tempting to say Brazil, but Brazil is Brazil. I'll say Italy, which draws tough South American and European sides (Paraguay and Slovakia) to go along with sacrificial lamb New Zealand.

Read more...

World Cup 2010 seeds

The seedings for Friday's group stage draw were released yesterday.

There were some fairly significant changes from past practice. For the past three, four, or five? World Cups, a combination of past performances in the World Cup (either two or more often three tournaments back) with an index based on current, one year, and two years past FIFA rankings. For 2010, it's the October FIFA ranking (only) combined with geography. The hosts, as is practice, are also seeded.

Teams are divided into four "pots"; each group will be populated with one team from each pot. Here they are:

Pot 1 (seeds): South Africa, Brazil, Spain, Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Argentina, England

Pot 2 (Asia, Oceania and North/Central America): Representing Asia: Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Australia; Oceania: New Zealand; CONCACAF: United States, Mexico, Honduras

Pot 3 (Africa and South America): Africa: Ivory Coast, Ghana, Cameroon, Nigeria, Algeria; S. America: Paraguay, Chile, Uruguay

Pot 4 (Unseeded Europe): France, Portugal, Slovenia, Switzerland, Greece, Serbia, Denmark, Slovakia

The logic is the "best" eight sides are kept apart in the group stage, and no two teams from the same confederation will meet in the group stage (thus making my dream match of South v North Korea highly unlikely) except for Europe -- there will be five groups with two European teams.

Hence, by selecting what FIFA believe to be the top eight sides, even though those top eight sides are not directly related to their own sketchy monthly rankings, and ensuring that those eight sides are placed in eight different group, the odds are significantly enhanced that those eight will make it through to the knock-out stages.

This doesn't always happen of course; France finishing last in its group in 2002 is a clear memory, but all eight seeded sides did progress in 2006, but it does sharply reduce the odds of, say, an Algeria v North Korea quarter final (but imagine the TV ratings back in Pyongyang).

There are, as usual when it comes to FIFA, some idiosyncrasies. Neither France nor Portugal are seeded, even though they both are (currently) ranked higher than England. I don't think France are all that any longer, but Portugal did knock England out at the quarter finals of both the 2006 WC and the 2004 European Championships. BBC Radio 5 Live suggested this morning that the French are being punished for the Ireland tie. What has not gone reported is that the seeds were based on the October, not November, rankings, in order to mitigate any built in advantage that teams involved in playoffs (as opposed to friendlies) during the month of November might have enjoyed.

Which is a different way of saying "FIFA sleight of hand". The only two teams in the top seven in November are Portugal (5th) and France (7th). Neither Argentina nor England would have been seeded.

What does this mean for the USA tomorrow? It's going to be grim, regardless; put the Confederations Cup performance away (which was uneven in any event). There are several best / worst case scenarios out there in blogosphere, but before we get too depressed, The Times has this worst case scenario for England:

a worst-case scenario would still involve them being drawn in the same group as France, Ivory Coast and the United States.

How sweet of the English media to suggest that the USA are in their own personal group of death. For the US, placing the CONCACAF and Asian and Oceania teams in the same pot means that we can not draw any of them -- this screws us as it's the weakest of the four pots; while ruling out the North v South Korea match, this also rules out the USA v North Korea match (remember France 1998 against Iran? I'd rather I didn't as well).

Prost Amerika suggests these best / worst cases:

Best Case Scenario: Argentina, USA, Algeria, Switzerland.
Worst Case Scenario: Spain, USA, Ivory Coast, France.

I'd rather draw South Africa from the first pot, but that would rule out Algeria from the third. It's a worthy trade off I think, so this is my best / worst case scenario:

Best: South Africa, USA, Paraguay, Greece (or Slovenia, or Switzerland . . . )
Worst: Brazil, USA, Ivory Coast, Portugal.

When it comes to drawing from the first pot, outside of the hosts they are all scary; when it comes to drawing the least dangerous of the European pot, there are several that are equally preferable to Portugal, France, or Denmark.

I will be discussing the resulting draw at some point this weekend, possibly even tomorrow evening (UK time).

Read more...